FHP announces daytime driver license, vehicle inspection checkpoints

Haven't posted here in a few years, but this thread made me sign in. Connecticut has already been implementing these "checkpoints". About three
weeks ago I was on my way to a client meeting when I came upon one of these. There were a total of five cruisers parked along both sides of the road
and troopers standing out in the street motioning cars to slow down as they approached. At first I assumed it was road construction, until I was
motioned to a full stop (I drive a bright colored, sporty coupe, so I'm sure that didn't help). The trooper walks up to my window and tells me to
pull over to the side of the road. I politely asked why I was pulled over, he told me it was a random safety inspection and that they're implementing
these all over the state. He proceeded to walk around my vehicle, then came back and asked for license and registration, went back to his cruiser (of
course to run my plates, but I could have told him he wouldn't find anything). He came back and told me I was free to go. The whole time he was at my
window he was visually scanning the interior of my car pretty heavily. As I drove away I thought to myself that this was extremely odd behavior for a
safety inspection. Considering the Sandy Hook incident happening not to long prior, maybe they amped up security, but I don't think that had anything
to do with it. Thought I'd share.

FHP says the checkpoints will be conducted during daytime hours, and generally cause delays of five minutes or less.

I can tell two things from that...

The line of cars that lead up to the actual checkpoint might be long but will only take 5 or so minutes for you to get up there and get through
because, they are making a precursory inpsection of the occupants only. Checking IDs, trunks or kicking tires on each and every car would back
it up for miles. I know they don't say this but if you appear white skinned... on your way. If you are brown, pull over to the secondary area.
They are checking for Illegal immigrants. Its Florida. Not Idaho.

"Daytime only" so they can better determine skin color. That would take longer at night.

sorry, but the wording of the thompson v. smith case is quite clear. the whole case is many pages long of dialogue between the two parties, and the
issue that started the lawsuit has little to do with the consequences of the final ruling.

traveling is constitutionally protected, and does not require registration or licensing. black's law dictionary has all the definitions if you need
them.

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
sorry, but the wording of the thompson v. smith case is quite clear. the whole case is many pages long of dialogue between the two parties, and the
issue that started the lawsuit has little to do with the consequences of the final ruling.

traveling is constitutionally protected, and does not require registration or licensing. black's law dictionary has all the definitions if you need
them.

Yes, the Court opinion is quite clear. But apparently it isn't clear enough for you, assuming you actually read the opinion, as you obviously missed
these parts of Thompson v. Smith:

1. "The exercise of such a common right the city may, under its police power, regulate in the interest of the public safety and
welfare; but it may not arbitrarily or unreasonably prohibit or restrict it, nor may it permit one to exercise it and refuse to permit another of like
qualifications, under like conditions and circumstances, to exercise it."

2. "The regulation of the exercise of the right to drive a private automobile on the streets of the city may be accomplished in part by the city by
granting, refusing, and revoking, under rules of general application, permits to drive an automobile on its streets; but such permits may not be
arbitrarily refused or revoked, or permitted to be held by some and refused to others of like qualifications, under like circumstances and
conditions."

The ruling does not say that operating an automobile can't be regulated.

this is an exercise in conditioning. they want people used to checkpoints, traffic stops, and unlawful search and seizures.

Yah I got pulled over a few weeks ago and the cop said he thought he saw me throw a cigarette out the window(fire hazard and all around here) but I
neither smoke nor had the window open in 13 degrees. I am hearing stories from friends that they got pulled over or had visits from the cops at their
homes. This is getting creepy.

It just occurred to me after reading more of the posts that he may have been errr looking for something else.....he mentioned that the car did not
smell like smoke.

This sounds highly illegal. There was, when I was living in Florida, no vehicle inspection. I have not heard of one being implemented since then,
either. If a state wants such an inspection, they need to get a law passed for that, and then give drivers time to get their vehicles in shape,
passed, and stickered. Random roadside inspections sounds like random searches to me, and thus against the Constitution.

This is not a new thing . People have been driving older and older vehicles now days and have put off vital repairs . This means brakes , steering and
lights have not been taken care of . As cars age they become less safe if not kept up . As far as the drug dog I have no problem with that . If there
is drugs in the car and you are doing them you are a safety hazard to everyone . Then there is the blinding head lights and inappropriate lights that
are popping up now days , that are a safety hazard for oncoming traffic or blinding drivers from behind .
If this is a safety check fine but if they start inappropriate searches checking for legal weapons of cars driven by people not prohibited to posess
them that is something else . You can look for Homeland Security to try to confinscate what they determine to be illegal and nobody will tell them no
!

In other words, You can take these three rights, but you can't have this one.

If you give them any of them, they will try to take them all.

This is why they do what they do. We find ways to justify it for them.

I lived in Florida back in 1987-88,Melborne area. Back then they would set up on interstate 95 and have a rolling check as they called it. They were
sneaky little troopers, They would set up signs telling you the check was X amount of miles ahead. Just allways seemed like they would also set up at
the top of that last exit before the check, this is where the dogs are. Most arrest's came at these points, not the rolling check on 95.

So you can bet , they have worked with their traffic planners and came up the the best alternate routes to avoid the license/safety checks. Here is
where they will really be. And alternative routes is where they'll catch the most people who have infractions.

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
traveling is constitutionally protected, and does not require registration or licensing. black's law dictionary has all the definitions if you need
them.

2. "The regulation of the exercise of the right to drive a private automobile on the streets of the city may be accomplished in part by the city by
granting, refusing, and revoking, under rules of general application, permits to drive an automobile on its streets; but such permits may not be
arbitrarily refused or revoked, or permitted to be held by some and refused to others of like qualifications, under like circumstances and
conditions."

The ruling does not say that operating an automobile can't be regulated.

Ummm......The difference is all in the wording...You will note that
the court used "drive" which legally means "to drive a commercial vehicle" the use of this term defines the limits of the granting. Before you
question the use of the term "private automobile"....ALL commercial vehicles are private and not public in nature, (to include City, County and
State as these are incorporated entities). However, when these terms (drive and private) are linked private becomes private "commercial". In order
for an individial to "drive" he/she must be a "driver", ie., "commercial", involved in commerce while in the act of driving.
All others are "traveling", and are merely travellers, which the courts do not address...You will note also that the court does not use the term
"operate or operator".

The ruling does not say that operating an automobile can't be regulated.

the right to travel is constitutionally guaranteed.

"The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and
individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda v. Arizona,
384 US 436, 491.

I don't understand; how can they conduct and execute inspections on vehicles when the state doesn't require it? That's right, there's no vehicle
inspection here in Florida. There are literally cars and vans traversing down I-95 that are duct taped and bungee-corded together!

So if it's not mandated on a state level how can this be enforced as an after-thought on a city level? I tell ya, this state is so backwards, corrupt
and impossible to manage that it needs to fall off into the Atlantic Ocean but only after I'm outta here first

Originally posted by openyourmind1262
I lived in Florida back in 1987-88,Melborne area. Back then they would set up on interstate 95 and have a rolling check as they called it. They were
sneaky little troopers, They would set up signs telling you the check was X amount of miles ahead. Just allways seemed like they would also set up at
the top of that last exit before the check, this is where the dogs are. Most arrest's came at these points, not the rolling check on 95.

So you can bet , they have worked with their traffic planners and came up the the best alternate routes to avoid the license/safety checks. Here is
where they will really be. And alternative routes is where they'll catch the most people who have infractions.

edit on 7-2-2013 by
openyourmind1262 because: (no reason given)

Up north (Daytona area) they conduct these stops mainly for drug running. Seeing they can't stop the influx of coc aine, heroine and pot coming
into this state by way of oceanic cargo (which is mainly where the drug trafficking starts and that's thanks to the CIA) they try to eliminate the
middle-man schmuck instead.

Sounds a little fishy to me. Let's just say for a second that this is not random or a grab at extra tax payer dollars. Instead, let's imagine a
world where Cuba has nuclear missiles, where Hammas is backing Cuba in it's hate and condemnation of the US. Let's get creepier. Let's imagine that
this Hamas (I think that is how you spell it) group has Iranian ties. And Iran has enriched uranium? Maybe? And has said that any movement on them
will be considered an act of war? I'm feeling a little doom and gloom. Let's throw in a war with Syria, backed by Russia, who is in deep with China,
who is backing North Korea, who claims to have developed their own ICBM and has something in the range of 8-20% enriched uranium, and is just wacky
enough to use it!!! Whew, I'm out of breath...Good thing we don't live in THAT world. Because if we did, that would make Florida one of the first
invasion points through Cuba's proximity. 90+ miles from Cuban soil to US soil. Having Police doing checkpoint searches in broad daylight along major
freeways could be the first security steps, looking for a secret invasion of foreign hostiles. BOO!

Without the inspections that once were the norm, it is now on the officers patrolling to "catch" these violators, whereas before, a lot were caught
(and kept off the road presumptively) when the state inspections were still around.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.